Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Green Party wish list.
Options
Comments
-
Shefwedfan wrote: »UK, France, Germany dont have hedgerows????Shefwedfan wrote: »No other country has hedge rows?
If you read my post earlier in the thread I said that we had about 4 times the hedgerows of the UK and it has way more than Europe in general. We have over 400K kilometers of hedge rows in the republic in an area of 27K sq miles. The UK has less hedge rows than us even though it has 3.5 times the land areaMrMusician18 wrote: »Yeah, there are no hedges in England :rolleyes:
https://www.google.ie/maps/@52.9224694,-2.321135,3a,75y,190.47h,80.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIqrgurO-WPY_D99U_FcJUA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Why do people come out with stuff that is demonstrably false.
Of course there are hedgerows in England - especially away form tillage areas.
I never said there was no hedge rows in the UK I said they had way less. They have about 350K Km in an area 3.5 times the size of IrelandShefwedfan wrote: »I live in part of Ireland and you could drive for miles without seeing a cow or any licestock. All grain, rapeseed etc. We have hedgerows.
I drove all over UK, they have grain fields which dwarf anything Ireland would have but they have hedgerows.....
Trying to say our percentage of trees would be higher if we counted headgerows is a bit mental to be honest. Due to risk of falling trees the number of large trees along roadside is rapidly decreasing as well and not been replaced
If the average hedgerow is 3 metre wide, which could be conservative in some cases it equivlent to 1.2 million HA of hedge rows. The really interesting thing is every time we plant a forest the first thing is they pull out the old hedge rowsShefwedfan wrote: »They have them in France and Germany as well....but I have limited experience.
But I have drove all over England and Wales and in the majority it is fairly similar to our hedgerows......
As you say you have limited experiences. There are hedgerows elsewhere in Europe mainly in Normandy but in general they have been removed and no where as dense as they were in Ireland. The big problem with some proposals on climate action is there is no accounting for the reality on the ground.
So we pull up hedge rows to plant non native trees. We stop producing beef and instead the British and the rest of Europe or China get there beef from Brazil where they are clearing an area of rainforest the size of Ireland every few months. We milk less cows and the Dutch or Polish produce much more using grains as opposed to grass. Guess what we will hit our climate change targets but it will do f@@k all for climate change as the US, China power ahead with there emission climbingSlava Ukrainii
0 -
Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.
0 -
the country is barely coming out of a massive economic shock .. consumers and businesses have both been badly hit and wont quickly forgive or forget the sudden imposition of green taxes at this of all times0
-
Leonard Hofstadter wrote: »Nobody expects the Greens to give a flying flamingo about rural Ireland.
People traditionally voted for FF and FG because their parties claimed to be the champions of it. Even as recently as the other day, Leo was saying that rural Ireland would be pleasantly surprised by what was in the forthcoming PfG (which has turned out to be completely untrue).
That's the difference.
Indeed.
The Greens electoral base is Dublin, more specifically south Dublin.
You know its the Greens: you need to change how you live, not us.
We will therefore not see green policies pushed that will impact wit great negativity on this cohort.
So aviation taxes will be out, but taxes on diesel will be in.
Taxes on fast fashion out, but destruction of rural markets and jobs will be in.
At the start of the process, the question was would it get past the green party membership - if what has been leaked resembles what is going to be the PfG the real question is if it will get past FG and in particular FFs membership.0 -
Exactly, the Greens' voter base is wealthy people in South County Dublin (along with some of the more salubrious parts of North Dublin) who have suddenly feigned a Damascus like conversion towards saving the planet, because it's now suddenly fashionable to care about it, despite the same people owning several large engined SUVs and going on very expensive holidays to exotic locations multiple times a year (before corona virus became a reality). It was also the favoured party of disaffected Fine Gael voters (mainly because they hid their craziness from the electorate back in February).
A surcharge on flying won't make one iota to this demographic's ability to go on far flung holidays (except allow them to feel slightly better about doing so), but for everyone else, it will make their lives more miserable and possibly prevent lower income people or those with families from travelling abroad. It will also stop tourism into the country. Now I'm certainly not in favour of over-tourism like what happens in Venice or Amsterdam to name but a few places, but I think we had struck a decent balance between selling our country abroad and not having it overrun by tourists with the associated negative consequences.
I certainly do not believe that flying should once again become the sole preserve of the wealthy, it's another example of how out of touch the Greens and now Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael are with the ordinary people of this country.0 -
Advertisement
-
Apparently we will get a referendum on the right to housing0
-
MrMusician18 wrote: »
At the start of the process, the question was would it get past the green party membership - if what has been leaked resembles what is going to be the PfG the real question is if it will get past FG and in particular FFs membership.
My understanding of this might be wrong, so please feel free to correct me if I am, but I thought the way FG's setup works it will actually be the easiest for them to get it passed if their parliamentary party approves it? I think they might be the party where their membership not liking it might come into play the least. And I don't think FF have such a tall order on their hands getting it passed as the Greens either. But again, please feel free to tell me if I'm wrong on any of that.0 -
Apparently we will get a referendum on the right to housing
We should also get one on the LNG terminal in Shannon, no point in being slaves to Russian gas when we can get it delivered from all over the world to Shannon. We already pay one of the highest energy prices in the EU from idiotic levies and taxes.0 -
the country is barely coming out of a massive economic shock .. consumers and businesses have both been badly hit and wont quickly forgive or forget the sudden imposition of green taxes at this of all timesMrMusician18 wrote: »Indeed.
The Greens electoral base is Dublin, more specifically south Dublin.
You know its the Greens: you need to change how you live, not us.
We will therefore not see green policies pushed that will impact wit great negativity on this cohort.
So aviation taxes will be out, but taxes on diesel will be in.
Taxes on fast fashion out, but destruction of rural markets and jobs will be in.
At the start of the process, the question was would it get past the green party membership - if what has been leaked resembles what is going to be the PfG the real question is if it will get past FG and in particular FFs membership.Leonard Hofstadter wrote: »Exactly, the Greens' voter base is very wealthy virtue signallers in South County Dublin (along with some of the posh places in North Dublin) who have suddenly feigned a Damascus like conversion towards saving the planet, because it's now suddenly fashionable to care about it, despite the same people owning several large engined SUVs and going on very expensive holidays to exotic locations multiple times a year (before corona virus became a reality). It was also the favoured party of disaffected Fine Gael voters (mainly because they hid their craziness from the electorate back in February).
A surcharge on flying won't make one iota to this demographic's ability to go on far flung holidays (except allow them to feel slightly better about doing so), but for everyone else, it will make their lives more miserable and possibly prevent lower income people or those with families from travelling abroad. It will also stop tourism into the country. Now I'm certainly not in favour of over-tourism like what happens in Venice or Amsterdam to name but a few places, but I think we had struck a decent balance between selling our country abroad and not having it overrun by tourists with the associated negative consequences.
I certainly do not believe that flying should once again become the sole preserve of the wealthy, it's another example of how out of touch the Greens and now Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael are with the ordinary people of this country.
Don't think anyone could argue with the following.- The reality is that current human practices are excessively detrimental to the environment.
- This will bring about irreversible changes if action is not taken.
- FG signed up to achieving certain targets which were deemed necessary to prevent the above happening.
- If anything, these targets are looking like they were even too limited in comparison to what is needed.
- Do you think action is needed?
- Do you think FG should offer solutions to achieve the targets which they signed us up to?
- What do you think should be done to achieve these targets?
This idea of ripping on the greens today whereas at other times lamenting that the politicians don't do what they said they'd do would be amusing if it wasn't so serious.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
Tell me how wrote: »Don't think anyone could argue with the following.
- The reality is that current human practices are excessively detrimental to the environment.
- This will bring about irreversible changes if action is not taken.
- FG signed up to achieving certain targets which were deemed necessary to prevent the above happening.
- If anything, these targets are looking like they were even too limited in comparison to what is needed.
- Do you think action is needed?
- Do you think FG should offer solutions to achieve the targets which they signed us up to?
- What do you think should be done to achieve these targets?
This idea of ripping on the greens today whereas at other times lamenting that the politicians don't do what they said they'd do would be amusing if it wasn't so serious.
It's not a case of ripping on the greens but pointing out that their policies for large swathes of the country amount to little more than " Do as I say, not as I do". Their policies will largely negativity effect groups that do not vote for them - and that's just on the environmental side. It's easy for them to talk of hamstringing agriculture when they or their goes won't be in the slightest but effected by it. They'd never get behind a policy that rationed discretionary air travel though, because they know their voters are among the most carbon intensive in that regard.
Then there is the social policy... I somehow doubt that when they end direct provision the approved housing will be located in the leafy areas they hail from....0 -
Eric Cartman wrote: »What would it even mean, like can i plonk myself on a bench for a night in dalkey vilage and demand the keys to a house there when I wake up, or does privat rental just get abolished .
It would mean that the state would be taking in a huge liability. It would be legally responsible for housing everyone in the last resort. What would end up happening is that almost everyone except the very wealthy will present themselves for state subsidized housing.
Should it pass sit would have enormous consequences for the state. It would effectively end the private rental market, and effectively nationalise house building. It would also be enormously expensive.0 -
MrMusician18 wrote: »It's not a case of ripping on the greens but pointing out that their policies for large swathes of the country amount to little more than " Do as I say, not as I do". Their policies will largely negativity effect groups that do not vote for them - and that's just on the environmental side. It's easy for them to talk of hamstringing agriculture when they or their goes won't be in the slightest but effected by it. They'd never get behind a policy that rationed discretionary air travel though, because they know their voters are among the most carbon intensive in that regard.
Then there is the social policy... I somehow doubt that when they end direct provision the approved housing will be located in the leafy areas they hail from....
So then, could you answer the questions I asked in my last post.
Do you think action is needed?
Do you think FG should offer solutions to achieve the targets which they signed us up to?
What do you think should be done to achieve these targets?
Because, I'm all for people calling out nonsense where they see it but this is an issue where I wish people were highlighting meaningful actions which they support because I think a lot of people absolve themselves from thinking about what they would do differently as long as there seems to be confusion about whether something should be done or not.0 -
Tell me how wrote: »So then, could you answer the questions I asked in my last post.
Do you think action is needed?
Do you think FG should offer solutions to achieve the targets which they signed us up to?
What do you think should be done to achieve these targets?
Because, I'm all for people calling out nonsense where they see it but this is an issue where I wish people were highlighting meaningful actions which they support because I think a lot of people absolve themselves from thinking about what they would do differently as long as there seems to be confusion about whether something should be done or not.
Without getting into a long policy discussion, the actions that we take should be, at their heart - effective. There is no point curtailing agriculture here if it means that we end up offloading that carbon bill onto other countries by importing cheap beef.
There is no point going after domestic personal transport if you are going to ignore aviation (see green manifesto which offloads responsibility to the EU).
What the greens seen to be proposing are for policies that will largely negativity impact the people that don't vote for them, while preserving and enhancing the lives of those that do. Fine you say, that's politics - but there's no fairness in that. Green policies should have a burden sharing element, where the richest should pay a higher price for carbon. The systems they (Greens) proposee are completely regressive - there is little or no meaningful financial penalty for those wealthy enough, who are by and large the green voters in south Dublin.
Maybe someone that earns 100k per year, should perhaps be paying a grand in a carbon levy for that third flight to Puerto Banus this Summer (forgetting about Covid, to illustrate a point)?0 -
Tell me how wrote: »Don't think anyone could argue with the following.
- The reality is that current human practices are excessively detrimental to the environment.
- This will bring about irreversible changes if action is not taken.
- FG signed up to achieving certain targets which were deemed necessary to prevent the above happening.
- If anything, these targets are looking like they were even too limited in comparison to what is needed.
- Do you think action is needed?
- Do you think FG should offer solutions to achieve the targets which they signed us up to?
- What do you think should be done to achieve these targets?
This idea of ripping on the greens today whereas at other times lamenting that the politicians don't do what they said they'd do would be amusing if it wasn't so serious.
Going around in circles once again with the same auld ****e. The selfish treehugger who doesn’t give a damn about anyone else but their own materialistic views. You can definately see that trend in these type of threads. Oh and you can be sure the ones banging on about climate change are the ones that the measures will never affect them too much.
You seem intelligent and going by your posts probably quite wealthy or at least comfortable so it would explain the condescending posts.
I do find it hilarious that the treehuggers who claim the science is correct about climate change but then if someone disagrees with them in a debate about something like the virus the scientists must be wrong, but that’s another story.
The Greens don’t care about anyone who are less well off. They don’t care about the ones struggling especially in rural areas. Carbon tax will make life harder for those people. Carbon tax is great IF there were alternatives but there isn’t and rural people depend on solid fuel and oil for heating and fuel for their cars to get around and not to mention the price of everything else going up because of the price rise of fossil fuels. But you don’t care about that right?
Personally it won’t affect me much because i’m comfortable , i’ll still heat my house, i’ll still fly no matter how much tax is put on a plane ticket. I’ll buy a Tesla if i can’t drive my high powered diesel car anymore. I’ll be ok but a lot of people i know will struggle and i feel sorry for them. I also feel sorry for people who work hard and have a famlly who can just scrape enough money to go on a dream holiday abroad but now with the threat of aviation taxes it could potentially prevent them from travelling for their well earned break. But let me guess you couldn’t careless right?
If the Greens get their way they will take the quality of life away from a lot of irish people. Treehuggers don’t care about this because they only care about material things like the quality of their salad in a window box.
I don’t care if i get threadbanned for this but you can piss off with your condescending questions.
I tell you what stop being a hypocrite and leave the country where SUV’s and V10’s whizz by you and move back to Ireland to abide by the Greens policies for climate change because your president won’t do anything about it.0 -
Going around in circles once again with the same auld ****e. The selfish treehugger who doesn’t give a damn about anyone else but their own materialistic views. You can definately see that trend in these type of threads. Oh and you can be sure the ones banging on about climate change are the ones that the measures will never affect them too much.
You seem intelligent and going by your posts probably quite wealthy or at least comfortable so it would explain the condescending posts.
I do find it hilarious that the treehuggers who claim the science is correct about climate change but then if someone disagrees with them in a debate about something like the virus the scientists must be wrong, but that’s another story.
The Greens don’t care about anyone who are less well off. They don’t care about the ones struggling especially in rural areas. Carbon tax will make life harder for those people. Carbon tax is great IF there were alternatives but there isn’t and rural people depend on solid fuel and oil for heating and fuel for their cars to get around and not to mention the price of everything else going up because of the price rise of fossil fuels. But you don’t care about that right?
Personally it won’t affect me much because i’m comfortable , i’ll still heat my house, i’ll still fly no matter how much tax is put on a plane ticket. I’ll buy a Tesla if i can’t drive my high powered diesel car anymore. I’ll be ok but a lot of people i know will struggle and i feel sorry for them. I also feel sorry for people who work hard and have a famlly who can just scrape enough money to go on a dream holiday abroad but now with the threat of aviation taxes it could potentially prevent them from travelling for their well earned break. But let me guess you couldn’t careless right?
If the Greens get their way they will take the quality of life away from a lot of irish people. Treehuggers don’t care about this because they only care about material things like the quality of their salad in a window box.
I don’t care if i get threadbanned for this but you can piss off with your condescending questions.
I tell you what stop being a hypocrite and leave the country where SUV’s and V10’s whizz by you and move back to Ireland to abide by the Greens policies for climate change because your president won’t do anything about it.
Wow!
Next.0 -
MrMusician18 wrote: »Without getting into a long policy discussion, the actions that we take should be, at their heart - effective. There is no point curtailing agriculture here if it means that we end up offloading that carbon bill onto other countries by importing cheap beef.
There is no point going after domestic personal transport if you are going to ignore aviation (see green manifesto which offloads responsibility to the EU).
What the greens seen to be proposing are for policies that will largely negativity impact the people that don't vote for them, while preserving and enhancing the lives of those that do. Fine you say, that's politics - but there's no fairness in that. Green policies should have a burden sharing element, where the richest should pay a higher price for carbon. The systems they (Greens) proposee are completely regressive - there is little or no meaningful financial penalty for those wealthy enough, who are by and large the green voters in south Dublin.
Maybe someone that earns 100k per year, should perhaps be paying a grand in a carbon levy for that third flight to Puerto Banus this Summer (forgetting about Covid, to illustrate a point)?
In other circles, some people suggest that wealthy people should pay a greater burden than what they currently pay and there is often strong push back from people saying that they have worked hard to achieve a degree of success and that targeting them for that success is unfair and, dare I say it, a socialist move.
There are people who comment on the current social views of the green party in not so pleasant terms and so I am not sure how they would take to a focus on targetting people of a particular income in such a way.
By the way, Eamon Ryan said in an interview earlier this year that it was their intent to introduce an aviation tax.DUBLIN (Reuters) - Ireland’s Green Party, likely to be a kingmaker after Saturday’s election, would re-introduce an aviation tax opposed by Ryanair and push two megaprojects to cut carbon emissions if it enters government, leader Eamon Ryan said in an interview this week.0 -
Tell me how wrote: »In other circles, some people suggest that wealthy people should pay a greater burden than what they currently pay and there is often strong push back from people saying that they have worked hard to achieve a degree of success and that targeting them for that success is unfair and, dare I say it, a socialist move.
There are people who comment on the current social views of the green party in not so pleasant terms and so I am not sure how they would take to a focus on targetting people of a particular income in such a way.
By the way, Eamon Ryan said in an interview earlier this year that it was their intent to introduce an aviation tax.
Indeed there is, but it would be nice if Green voters had to pay for the policies that the Green party espouses. It is too easy to sit in your house in south Dublin, with the office job in the city and say that agriculture should pay so much more that it should effectively be broken, but not me, (or rather I'm happy to pay a 15c levy on my coffee cup and feel great about it - saving the planet, yay!)
Carbon taxes don't force people to choose alternatives, because the alternatives that exist either are not capable or don't exist at all. Carbon taxes force people to ration.
The green party manifesto had nothing on aviation tax beyond some wishy washy stuff on global taxes and a european approach. So that was Eamonn going off on a solo run perhaps...0 -
With all the doom and gloom cannot anyone point me in the direction of the agreement and which policy you have issues with? Thanks0
-
Advertisement
-
MrMusician18 wrote: »It would mean that the state would be taking in a huge liability. It would be legally responsible for housing everyone in the last resort. What would end up happening is that almost everyone except the very wealthy will present themselves for state subsidized housing.
Should it pass sit would have enormous consequences for the state. It would effectively end the private rental market, and effectively nationalise house building. It would also be enormously expensive.
The state dominates sick care in this country, waiting lists are a fact of life and are much longer every Winter. What did you think is going to happen with state control of housing:
1. Limited budgets.
2. Specification inflation, those extras drive costs of shelter higher.
3. They will build where it is cheapest and that is not where there is ready available public transport, living near the electric train already commands a premium. (Sections 48 and 49 of the Planning & Development Act 2000).
4. There will also be objections raised by party core voters i.e. Something needs to be done, but not in my vicinity.
5. Waiting lists (given the way the politics has gone lately allocation will be decided by intersectionality score.)Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.
0 -
https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2020/0501/1135962-carbon-tax-kicks-in/
Carbon taxes kicked in recently that were set in last years budget by the way. Not sure why you all aren’t losing it over that, is it because the Greens weren’t responsible?0 -
Thelonious Monk wrote: »https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2020/0501/1135962-carbon-tax-kicks-in/
Carbon taxes kicked in recently that were set in last years budget by the way. Not sure why you all aren’t losing it over that, is it because the Greens weren’t responsible?
Not only that by the end of the year, Cost push inflation driven by supply cuts. (force majeure, production cuts, bankruptcies, and recession.) Our entire production and distribution depends on availability of fossil fuels, those costs work their way into our weekly shopping bills.Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.
0 -
[Deleted User] wrote: »And what's more Dairy Cattle and Beef Cattle are generally not the same much as Chicken Broilers and Layers are not the same.
You said cattle are not bred on beef farms0 -
-
Tell me how wrote: »Wow!
Next.
He's not wrong, and your dismissive response just proves his point.
We've been here before with the Greens and don't forget that only 7% of those who turned up on the day actually voted for them.
It's frankly ridiculous that FF/FG are bending over to accommodate their "tax everything for the environmental feels" nonsense and that we as the electorate are tolerating it. I suppose the blanket Covid coverage over the last few months has nicely shielded/distracted most from what's been going on.
As for the "but what about our commitments to Europe" bit you keep harping on about. Ignore it, or renegotiate it. After all there was no problem rewriting or ignoring treaty or legal agreements when it suited Germany and others a decade ago and we are facing into a recession worse than that now. All these policies and agreements will do is make that significantly more painful for those least able to bear it - namely those middle class earners who pay for everything in this country.
It certainly won't affect the smug Green voter in South County Dublin to a great extent, and the "vulnerable" will of course be sheltered from dramatic welfare cuts, but those who "get up early in the morning" and commute an hour or two to the office for very little in return from this State will certainly feel it.
And ultimately, to what end? Ireland crucifying it's workforce and economic strategy on the altar of the Green agenda will mean nothing in the scheme of things so long as developing countries, China, the US and others do what they want.
But sure, as long as those wealthy environmentalists in the suburbs can feel good about their comfortable insulated lifestyles, I'm sure it's all worth it right? :rolleyes:0 -
I'm from the northside of Dublin and myself and family and friends voted for the Greens. Some of them, shock horror, may even be considered working class! I can think of one mate who's a sparks and my brother who drives a taxi currently, both voted for the Greens.0
-
Thelonious Monk wrote: »I'm from the northside of Dublin and myself and family and friends voted for the Greens. Some of them, shock horror, may even be considered working class! I can think of one mate who's a sparks and my brother who drives a taxi currently, both voted for the Greens.
There'll always be outliers and those who are driven by a misguided or guilt-ridden need to somehow make up for the lifestyle they enjoy in a modern first world country. Or who voted Greens because they couldn't stomach FF or FG and didn't trust SF (and on that last one I would agree personally)
Still only 7% though. Not enough to risk pushing us even deeper into recession over, or ignoring that the rest of the electorate DIDN'T vote for Eamon and co's nonsense.0 -
Thelonious Monk wrote:I'm from the northside of Dublin and myself and family and friends voted for the Greens. Some of them, shock horror, may even be considered working class! I can think of one mate who's a sparks and my brother who drives a taxi currently, both voted for the Greens.
Generally vote greens myself, but I'm realistic, I think ffg will run rings around them, they ll struggle to get their wish over the line, and they've a hell of a lot of work to do to gain more support from the general population. They come up with some daft ideas at times also0 -
Advertisement
-
Thelonious Monk wrote: »I'm from the northside of Dublin and myself and family and friends voted for the Greens. Some of them, shock horror, may even be considered working class! I can think of one mate who's a sparks and my brother who drives a taxi currently, both voted for the Greens.
1st or 10th preference vote? more importantly what was the rationale behind their selection?Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.
0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoXYTHlWXvQ
Advertisement